Bill introduced to the Missouri House on January 24, 2011 dealing with the issue of Proof of United States Citizenship.

Summary of the Introduced Bill

HB 283 -- Declarations of Candidacy

Sponsor: Rowland

This bill requires each established political party to provide the Missouri Secretary of State with proof of the identity and proof of United States citizenship for each nominee for President and Vice President of the United States. The proof must be submitted with the other certification documents that are required to be filed with the Secretary of State pursuant to Chapter 115, RSMo.

Missouri House of Representatives 96th General Assembly , 1st Regular Session Activity History for HB 283

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Sections 115.399 and 115.761, RSMo, are repealed and two new sections enacted in lieu thereof, to be known as sections 115.399 and 115.761, to read as follows:

115.399. 1. Not later than the twelfth Tuesday prior to each presidential election, or notwithstanding any prior laws to the contrary, in the year 1996 and thereafter, within seven working days after choosing its nominees for president and vice president of the United States, whichever is later, the state committee of each established political party shall certify in writing to the secretary of state the names of its nominees for president and vice president of the United States. Such certification shall include proof of identity and proof of United States citizenship for each nominee.

2. Not later than the third Tuesday prior to each presidential election, the state committee of each established political party shall certify in writing to the secretary of state the names of its nominees for presidential elector. At least one qualified resident of each congressional district shall be named as a nominee for presidential elector by each state committee, and the number of nominees for presidential elector named by each state committee shall equal the number to which the state is entitled.

3. When submitted for filing, each certification made by a state committee pursuant to the provisions of subsection 2 of this section shall be accompanied by a declaration of candidacy for each candidate for presidential elector. Each declaration of candidacy shall state the candidate's full name, residence address, office for which such person proposes to be a candidate and that if elected the person will qualify. Each such declaration shall be in substantially the following form:

I, . . . . . . . , a resident of the . . . . . . . congressional district and the state of Missouri do announce myself a candidate for the office of presidential elector from the . . . congressional district (state at large) on the . . . . ticket, to be voted for at the presidential election to be held on the . . . . day of . . . , 20. ., and I further declare that if nominated and elected to such office I will qualify.

Residence address Signature of election official or officer authorized to

administer oaths

Each such declaration shall be subscribed and sworn to by the candidate before the election official receiving the certification, a notary public or other officer authorized by law to administer oaths.

115.761. 1. The official list of presidential candidates for each established political party shall include the names of all constitutionally qualified candidates for whom, on or after 8:00 a.m. on the fifteenth Tuesday prior to the presidential primary, and on or before 5:00 p.m., on the eleventh Tuesday prior to the presidential primary, a written request to be included on the presidential primary ballot is filed with the secretary of state. Such written request shall include proof of identity and proof of United States citizenship for each candidate, along with:

(1) Receipt of payment to the state committee of the established political party on whose ballot the candidate wishes to appear of a filing fee of one thousand dollars; or

(2) A written statement, sworn to before an officer authorized by law to administer oaths, that the candidate is unable to pay the filing fee and does not have funds in a campaign fund or committee to pay the filing fee and a petition signed by not less than five thousand registered Missouri voters, as determined by the secretary of state, that the candidate's name be placed on the ballot of the specified established political party for the presidential preference primary. The request to be included on the presidential primary ballot shall include each signer's printed name, registered address and signature and shall be in substantially the following form:

I (We) the undersigned, do hereby request that the name of ............................... be placed upon the February .........., ......., presidential primary ballot as candidate for nomination as the nominee for President of the United States on the .................... party ticket.

2. The state or national party organization of an established political party that adopts rules imposing signature requirements to be met before a candidate can be listed as an official candidate shall notify the secretary of state by October first of the year preceding the presidential primary.

3. Any candidate or such candidate's authorized representative may have such candidate's name stricken from the presidential primary ballot by filing with the secretary of state on or before 5:00 p.m. on the eleventh Tuesday prior to the presidential primary election a written statement, sworn to before an officer authorized by law to administer oaths, requesting that such candidate's name not be printed on the official primary ballot. Thereafter, the secretary of state shall not include the name of that candidate in the official list announced pursuant to section 115.758 or in the certified list of candidates transmitted pursuant to section 115.765.

4. The filing times set out in this section shall only apply to presidential preference primaries, and are in lieu of those established in section 115.349.

Now if we can get 20 to 25 other states to take action before 2011 then the Presidential election of 2012 might make Obama drop out as he will have to comply or forced to be a One term President.

Lets hope Missouri passes this but then the Rat Party Governor Jay Nixon will probably refuse to sign the bill. I wonder if the House has an over ride system?

It looks like sloppy legislation to me. Well-meaning perhaps. But isn’t it always?

It won’t be easy for states to draft and pass good laws around presidential qualifications as long as the SCOTUS won’t decide exactly what the COTUS means and there is no Constitutionally-defined process for making sure the qualifications have been met.

7
posted on 01/28/2011 11:47:17 AM PST
by swain_forkbeard
(Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)

The laws basically just have to codify a particular definition of NBC and then let SCOTUS rule whether that definition is Constitutional. That’s the only way we’re going to get a definition of NBC.

It means that any bill that is introduced will be challenged by the DOJ, which also means that the law should have a severability clause to keep a judge from issuing an injunction against the whole thing - which would possibly allow the DOJ to stall until it’s too late for the law to take effect in 2012.

Such certification shall include proof of identity and proof of United States citizenship for each nominee.

Proof of United States Citizenship is not the same as proving Natural Born Citizenship. All one needs to show as "evidence" of your Citizenship status is a passport. If you present a valid passport issued by the United States Government saying you are a Citizen of the United States, that is prima facie evidence of your status as a Citizen of the United States. I'm sure Obama has such a document. Actually all he needs to show is his Presidential ID. I think any court in the Nation would consider that sufficient evidence of "citizenship."

The problem is not Obama's citizenship, it is his status at the time of his birth. I don't see anything in this law that requires anyone to produce a birth certificate or other evidence of Natural Born Citizen status or to even prove they were born in the United States. Under this law Arnold Schwartenegger could get on the ballot.

Last time I read there were 5 states with this type of legislation submitted. We need to get all these guys together and the support behind them. Here is Texas's version, a bit simpler.

82R302 JRJ-D
By: Berman H.B. No. 295
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to certification for placement on the ballot of candidates
for president or vice-president of the United States.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 192.033, Election Code, is amended by
amending Subsection (a) and adding Subsection (d) to read as
follows:
(a) Except as provided by Subsection (c) or (d), the
secretary of state shall certify in writing for placement on the
general election ballot the names of the candidates for president
and vice-president who are entitled to have their names placed on
the ballot.
(d) The secretary of state may not certify the name of a
candidate for president or vice-president unless the candidate has
presented the candidate's original birth certificate indicating
that the person is a natural-born United States citizen.
SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2011.

21
posted on 01/28/2011 12:11:14 PM PST
by Texas Fossil
(Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.)

I see two issues here. Besides citizenship versus natural born citizenship, the requirement should be more than just presenting the document(s) to the state’s SOS. The legislation should go one step further, and require the SOS to publish in some form or manner these documents as well.

25
posted on 01/28/2011 12:34:49 PM PST
by C210N
(0bama, Making the US safe for Global Marxism)

candidate's original birth certificate indicating that the person is a natural-born United States citizen.

A Birth Certificate doesn't indicate the citizenship of the parents. Other documents showing the citizenship of the parents, at the time of the birth, would also have to be submitted to prove NATURAL BORN CITIZEN status.

30
posted on 01/28/2011 1:43:19 PM PST
by ASA Vet
(Natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. De Vattel)

Asking specifically for the “long form” would be a ‘poison pill’ that would make this legislation unconstitutional according to the full faith and credit clause.

We need to pass legislation that requires the candidate to request the State of birth send proof of birth within that State directly to the SO-State to be put on the ballot of the State.

The form Hawaii says they issue for proof of birth within the State of Hawaii is the short form.

Why would the Hawaii DOH issuing the short form directly to the SO-State of the balloting State not be sufficient?

Better to swing for the fences and get a unconstitutional strike out? Or to hit the easy ball right over the plate and score a base hit towards our goal of ensuring that candidates are actually eligible?

32
posted on 01/28/2011 1:50:57 PM PST
by allmendream
(Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)

Asking specifically for the long form would be a poison pill that would make this legislation unconstitutional according to the full faith and credit clause.

It shouldn't be a problem in Hawaii. By law, any part of any certificate must be made available to a legal requester. The DOH can't arbitrarily decide not to give out a long form because they don't want to.

Contact your friends or family in Missouri and ask them to encourage their State Representatives to support this bill.

Missouri HB 283
Requires proof of identity and proof of United States citizenship to be filed with declarations of candidacy and certifications of nomination for the office of President and Vice President

We definitely need a law that clearly states that the citizens have standing in a court of law when a Presidential or Vice Presidential Candidate claims “Natural Born” citizenship status when in fact he/she is not a natural born citizen. Obama has clearly been able to plead the fifth in covering up his birth records. I know his birth records do not prove his citizenship but they do list his parents, one of which is said to be a Kenyan if you are to believe his autobiography.

38
posted on 01/28/2011 6:14:01 PM PST
by missnry
(The truth will set you free ... and drive liberals Crazy!)

Such written request shall include proof of identity and proof of United States citizenship for each candidate

I agree, was going to say the same thing.
There’s nothing in this bill that specifies the precise documentation that’s required. So they could get any corrupt democrat to sign off on a scrap of postit note and they’d call it golden.

39
posted on 01/29/2011 5:49:31 AM PST
by Samurai_Jack
(ride out and confront the evil!)

Well one State legislator was looking into drafting a bill to demand from would be Presidential candidates prove their eligibility (something I support completely and cannot believe wasn't done previously) by providing the “long form”.

While he was looking into this, he discovered, much to his chagrin - that his OWN State only issues a computer generated “short form” as official proof of birth within the State.

Under the “full faith and credit clause” of the U.S. Constitution - if a State says their official document is proof of birth within that State - AND it meets the requirements set forth by Congress (and the short forms do) then all other States are obligated - under the full faith and credit clause - to recognize it as proof of birth within that State.

As such, California (for example) MUST accept a Texas “short form” as proof of birth within Texas IF that “short form” fulfills the requirements set forth by Congress AND Texas law says that it is official documentation of birth within Texas.

41
posted on 03/30/2011 8:41:29 AM PDT
by allmendream
(Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)

I hate to ask the question, but is there therefore any way (that you can think of, at least) to draft a law requiring a candidate who appears to have a short-form COLB from Hawaii to produce the full certificate?

(AFAIK) Only if Congress spells out the criteria for proof of birth within a state such that only the original “long form” would apply.

This is troublesome in that many municipalities have no permanent paper copy on archive and only have a “database” able to print out these “short forms”.

Thus many Americans would not, if the law were changed, be able to prove their birth within the State - despite both they and the State following all laws and regulations set forth by Congress to document and certify such.

But back to my original question. Is it better to “swing for the fences” and strike out on it being Unconstitutional? Or is it better to have a reasonable and Constitutional law that establishes what we want to establish?

What would be wrong with having the Hawaii DOH directly send the official form the State of Hawaii says is proof of birth within their State - directly to the SOS of the State certifying that they are qualified to be on the ballot?

43
posted on 03/30/2011 11:52:15 AM PDT
by allmendream
(Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)

As in, (very preliminary and off the top of my head on the wording here)

"(a) the (whoever is responsible) shall provide (to whomever), where available from a [State government, consular record of birth abroad or other certifying authority] a birth certificate or other official registration of birth containing the following items: [list]..."

"(b) In the event that a birth certificate or other official registration of birth meeting the description in subparagraph (a) above is not available from [etc.] (due to the fact that that agency does not provide records in that form or with that degree of completeness), then the (whoever is responsible) shall provide (to whomever) a (Certificate of Live Birth) or [whatever appropriate alternative(s)]..."

"In the event that (a candidate) fails to provide proof of eligibility for office as specified by subparagraph (a) or alternately by subparagraph (b), then the candidate's name shall not be listed on the ballot for the specified election."

What would be wrong with having the Hawaii DOH (or whatever State DOH, this law being designed to not be a bill of attainder applicable to just one individual) send the form they deem to be proof of birth within that State, and that fulfills the requirements specified by Congress, directly to the SOS of the State certifying the qualification to be on the ballot?

Why would that not be sufficient to establish what it is said the law was designed to establish?

45
posted on 03/30/2011 2:49:28 PM PDT
by allmendream
(Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)

As we’ve seen in the case of Obama, even if the COLB is legitimate, it doesn’t necessarily establish that he was indeed born in Hawaii.

There’s probably a separate issue here, too. We need to establish not only that the candidate was born in the United States (or as a US citizen, and some proposed laws may fall short by not recognizing that a person can be born overseas to US parents and never have any citizenship but US citizenship, and thus also be native-born), but also that there is no good reason to believe that citizenship meets Constitutional muster and has not been invalidated since then.

From what I’ve read, Obama even if born in the US may still not be eligible to the office of President by virtue of (a) having been born to a father who wasn’t by anybody’s definition a US citizen, or (b) having been legally adopted by Soetoro (and given Indonesian citizenship?)

Or both.

So here we have a candidate who may be ineligible to the office for not just one, but up to three separate reasons.

Well no State law can or will be able to establish what you seem to want it to establish.

I find it unlikely that any U.S. Court will ever rule that a person born a citizen of the USA is not a “natural born citizen”.

There are only two ways of becoming a citizen, and the way you become a citizen determines if you are natural born or naturalized. IMHO.

A “poof of identity and proof of United States citizenship” bill to get on the ballot in Missouri is fine, and they may indeed specify that to be on the ballot for the President one may not be a naturalized citizen - but they cannot take it upon themselves to define what a natural born citizen is.

47
posted on 03/30/2011 4:12:03 PM PDT
by allmendream
(Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.